doubt. If the findings of others were all that the 

 publicity and exploitation of these implied, what 

 explanation could be given to those errors of judg- 

 ment in the crab wherein it defeats the purpose of 

 concealment in assuming a gaudy disguise? In- 

 deed, this aberration is more than a mental mis- 

 take — it is an error of instinct (if we grant that 

 so fundamental an attribute exists apart from the 

 higher operations of the mind) . And yet, even so, 

 ascribing whatever terms we will to the psy- 

 chism of a crab, is it not possible to explain these 

 errors in more material terms as well 4 ? So, at least, 

 it seemed to me. The idea that such vagaries of 

 behavior were due to the independent functioning 

 of the brain, did not appeal to me. I was decided 

 to trace a more tangible cause. 



But exactly how 4 ? The only obvious way open 

 toward this end was through mutilation — I would 

 be obliged to operate upon a spider-crab and re- 

 move the brain — a procedure I was ill inclined 

 to carry out, and then only as a last resort. 



Let me say here, I am not an anti-vivisectionist. 

 I am convinced of the necessity for experimental 

 work upon living animals. This necessity, particu- 

 larly in pathological research, is so patent that its 



[241] 



